Northern Ireland: Advice to Ministers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 19 November (WA 323), why the Northern Ireland Department for Culture, Arts and Leisure officials Dr Edward Rooney and Mrs Patricia McAllister did not communicate the advice concerning the budget for the Ulster-Scots Agency for 2003 to the Minister as directly requested by the chairman of the Agency.

Baroness Amos: Officials take account of a range of representations when providing advice to Ministers. However, in line with Part II, paragraph 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information it is not the practice of government to comment on advice given to Ministers by officials.

Northern Ireland: Religious Discrimination

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 19 November (WA 329), whether the Northern Ireland Equality Commission is opposed to religious discrimination in all sectors of employment.

Baroness Amos: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 19 November 2003 (WA 329).

North/South Language Body: Budget

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 353), what is the difference between the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs advising the Department for Culture Arts and Leisure of the 2003 budget for the Language Body and the former department advising the latter department of its provision for the budget for 2003, when the Government are obliged to provide three times the Eire contribution.

Baroness Amos: I have nothing further to add to my answer given on the 20 November (WA 353). maria

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 351), whether any department in either Government have agreed the 2004 budget with any of the Bodies; and, if not, why the schedule is not being adhered to.

Baroness Amos: In accordance with the arrangements under the agreement made by the exchange of notes between the two governments dated 19 November 2002, recommended budget allocations for North/South implementation bodies are subject to joint agreement by Ministers North and South and cannot be agreed separately by any department in either jurisdiction. The budget process has not yet been completed in respect of 2004.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 349), what meetings have taken place since 1999 between stakeholders in both jurisdictions; who was represented; and when the next meeting is scheduled.

Baroness Amos: Since 1999, officials from the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) and the Irish Department of Finance (DoF) have met frequently in connection with the drafting of the rules of the North/South Pension Scheme and related issues. DFP and DoF officials have also held meetings with the chief executive officers (CEOs) of the North/South bodies and/or their staff, and have attended meetings with the North/South Ministerial Council Secretariat. Occasionally, officials from the Office of the First and Deputy First Ministers and the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs have been involved in meetings where the progress towards implementation of the scheme has been discussed.
	The CEOs and/or their representatives have met with the Trade Unions, North and South, on three occasions during 2002–03.
	In addition, DFP and DoF officials, and on one occasion the North/South Ministerial Council Joint Secretaries, have attended meetings between stakeholders in GB and Ireland. In GB, these involved the Government Actuary's Department, Inland Revenue or the Department for Work and Pensions. In Ireland, these involved the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, the Department for Social and Family Affairs, or the Pensions Board.
	A meeting between the NSMC Joint Secretaries, a DFP official, a legal advisor, and officials from the Department for Work and Pensions, in London, is scheduled for 15 December 2003.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 351), whether proportionality of funding is being considered for 2004 for all cross-Border implementation bodies.

Baroness Amos: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 8 September (WA 4).

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 350), whether they can give an undertaking that the year 2000 accounts for the Language Implementation Body will be certified in a similar way to all other accounts for cross-Border implementation bodies and with the same wording.

Baroness Amos: The certification of the accounts of cross-Border implementation bodies is the responsibility of the Comptroller and Auditor-General for Northern Ireland and the Comptroller and Auditor-General for the Republic of Ireland. The accounts for all North/South implementation bodies are audited in accordance with the relevant provisions of the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 and the British-Irish Agreement Act 1999.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the written answer by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 352), concerning the £8.4 million underspend expected from the 2003 budgets of the cross-Border implementation bodies, why an underspend is permitted in their business cases.

Baroness Amos: Business cases reflect the planned level of activity, and associated costs, for the year in question, and do not include any provision for underspend. However, it is always possible that unforeseen factors may emerge which give rise to an underspend.
	The Answer of 20 November outlines the factors which have emerged during 2003, giving rise to expected underspends for that year.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What activities of the cross-Border bodies require the preparation of a business case.

Baroness Amos: In accordance with the relevant financial memorandum, each North/South implementation body is required to prepare an annual business plan, together with details of the associated budgetary requirements. The business plan should cover all planned activities for the year in question.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 4 December (WA 31) and 17 November (WA 235) concerning the "number of factors" which indicate the appropriate proportionality of funding for the Ulster Scots Agency in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, why they have refused to detail these factors; and whether they will now do so.

Baroness Amos: I have nothing further to add to the Answers given on 4 December 2003 (WA 31), and 17 November (WA 235).

Special European Union Programmes Body: Chief Executive

Lord Laird: asked her Majesty's Government:
	What is the current status of the former chief executive of the European Special Programmes Implementation Body; whether he will be taking up his post again; and, if not, whether he is in receipt of a pension or other considerations as a result of his time as chief executive.

Baroness Amos: After being reinstated on Friday 5 December 2003 the chief executive of the Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB) subsequently resigned with effect from Wednesday 10 December 2003. He was entitled to, and has received seven weeks' pay in lieu of notice. The North/South implementation bodies do not yet have a pension scheme, and in the interim period, Mr McKinney is entitled to payments equivalent to what would be payable under the provisions of the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (Northern Ireland). The lump sum equivalent to what would be payable under those terms is being paid immediately. Mr McKinney also received a one-off ex gratia payment of £20,000, and solicitors' costs of £2,500, under the terms agreed with the British and Irish Governments to resolve the uncertainty over the SEUPB, in the public interest.

North/South Ministerial Secretariat

Lord Laird: asked her Majesty's Government:
	How, as part of the review of the Belfast agreement announced by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, they intend to scrutinise:
	(a) the actions of the Eire Government in implementing human rights activity;
	(b) the workings of the Special European Programmes Body and its relationship to the North-South Ministerial Joint Secretariat; (c) the conditions of employment of the first chief executive of the Special European Programmes Body; and (d) the approach of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure over the past two years in dealing with the Language Implementation Body.

Baroness Amos: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 11 December 2003 (WA 78).

Northern Ireland Parliament 1921–72: Legislation

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 17 November (WA 236), whether the Parliament of Northern Ireland enacted any legislation between 1921 and 1972 which is no longer in force and which was discriminatory on the grounds of religious belief.

Baroness Amos: I am not aware of any legislative provision enacted by the Parliament of Northern Ireland which was discriminatory on the grounds of religious belief.

Northern Ireland Police Fund

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who are the members of the board of the Northern Ireland Police Fund; how many persons are employed by the fund; whether each employee is vetted for security purposes prior to employment; and which service performs any such vetting procedure.

Baroness Amos: The members of the board of the Northern Ireland Police Fund are:
	Sir John Semple (Chairman)
	Mrs Kate Carlisle
	Dr John Galway
	ACC Duncan McCausland
	Mr David McClurg
	Mrs Francesca Reid
	Lord Rogan
	Mr Robert Wilson.
	A team of seven staff is employed by the fund; five deal with administrative duties and two are assessment officers.
	It is not government practice to comment on individual cases in relation to security vetting. My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Northern Ireland (Jane Kennedy) made a Written Statement in the other place on 15 December about progress on the review of security vetting arrangements (Official Report, col. 127WS) a copy is available in the Library. The Police Fund will be included in the ongoing programme to improve the effectiveness of protective security arrangements.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 4 December (WA 31) and 12 November (WA 199) concerning the incorrect titling of the staff remuneration for the Language Implementation Body decision paper, why they have refused to indicate which department made the error; and whether they will now name the department responsible.

Baroness Amos: I have nothing further to add to the answers given on 12 November (WA 199) and 4 November 2003 (WA 31).

Northern Ireland Executive for Education

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of funds allocated by the Northern Ireland Executive for Education in the last financial year was spent on administration; and what was spent of providing education.

Baroness Amos: In the 2002–03 financial year 4.1 per cent of funds allocated for education was spent on administration; 95.9 per cent on providing education.

Northern Ireland Executive for Health

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of funds allocated by the Northern Ireland Executive for Health in the last financial year was spent on administration; and what was spent on providing healthcare.

Baroness Amos: Of the final funds allocated to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety for 2002–03, total expenditure on management and administration costs by the four health and social services boards and 19 health and social services trusts amounted to 4.6 per cent. In addition, the department's own administration costs amounted to £36 million. Taken together, therefore, the total percentage of the 2002–03 final allocation spent on administration and management amounted to 6.1 per cent. A further 91.4 per cent was spent on delivery of health and social services and the remaining 2.5 per cent was spent on the provision of an effective fire-fighting, rescue and fire safety service.

Ulster-Scots Community: Parity of Esteem

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Lord President on 20 November (WA 356) and 10 December (WA 63) concerning parity of esteem, when the section of the Joint Declaration of 11 May 2003 concerning the diversity of traditions and respect for civil, political, social and cultural rights will be applied to those of an Ulster-Scots background; and whether it has been so applied to date.

Baroness Amos: I refer the noble Lord to the previous Answers given on 20 November (Official Report, col. WA 356) and 10 December 2003 (Official Report, col. WA 63).

Construction Industry Training Board: NI Firms Working Abroad

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What legal advice has been received regarding Construction Industry Training Board levies for employees of Northern Ireland firms working abroad.

Baroness Amos: This issue was raised at a full meeting of the Construction Industry Training Board earlier this year and it was then referred to the Department for Employment and Learning for further guidance on the interpretation of the legislation. The department referred the matter to its legal advisers. In line with Part II, paragraph 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information and under Part II, paragraph 4b, Law Enforcement and Legal Proceedings, it would be inappropriate to disclose the information requested by the noble Lord.

Northern Ireland: Conservation Areas and Demolitions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many properties have been demolished in conservation areas in Northern Ireland in the past five years.

Baroness Amos: In the past five years, Planning Service has granted 195 consents to demolish buildings within a conservation area. Once consent to demolish has been granted, Planning Service does not monitor whether the demolition work has taken place.

Olympic Games 2012: London Bid and Prime Minister's Support

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What events the Prime Minister has attended during 2003 to promote the 2012 London Olympic Bid.

Baroness Amos: The Prime Minister fully supports the bid to host the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games in London and was directly involved with the announcement of government support on 15 May 2003. He will continue to attend events as appropriate.

Trade Liberalisation: Impact on Developing Countries

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will initiate research, either directly or through the International Labour Organisation and the World Trade Organisation, to assess the exact impact of trade liberalisation on (a) developing countries, and (b) the poorest people in the world; and whether they consider that such research should cover food security within countries, sustainable agriculture, and the protection of the natural environment.

Baroness Amos: DfID is working closely with the international financial institutions and other multilateral and bilateral bodies to quantify the potential gains to developing countries of international and domestic trade liberalisation. Although estimates vary across studies, on balance evidence suggests that developing countries benefit from increased trade openness in the same proportion as richer countries. Furthermore, a reduction of a country's own trade barriers tends to bring real benefits to its consumers, including poor consumers.
	None the less, while the reforms may lead to aggregate gains in a country's economic welfare, they inevitably create losers. As well as undertaking studies on the effects of trade reform on livelihoods and food security of the poor segments of the population in developing countries, DfID is working with a number of developing country partners and through the multilateral system to link the trade agenda within countries' own development strategies. We are also supporting the EU's sustainability impact assessments, which aim to gauge the potential economic, social and environmental impacts of the WTO negotiations on affected sectors in both the EU and developing countries. The intention is to ensure that liberalisation is accompanied by other policies to help maximize the economic opportunities for all and mitigate adverse impacts on poor households.

Millennium Development Goals

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps it is taking to review its policies and approach to the role of agriculture in achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

Baroness Amos: The Department for International Development has published a new policy paper on agriculture: "Agriculture and poverty reduction: unlocking the potential."
	The paper sets out DfID's commitment to agriculture as a fundamental part of the Government's approach to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The paper provides details of DfID's current activities in agriculture through both its central and country programmes, and outlines DfID's approach to finding new ways of reversing agriculture's relative decline and stagnation in many of the world's poorest countries.
	Copies of this policy paper have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses and comments are welcome. The contact point is agriculture@dfid.gov.uk

Fair Trade: Chocolate

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to encourage the supermarket chains in the United Kingdom to stock fair-trade chocolates using cocoa from countries such as Ghana.

Baroness Amos: The Secretary of State for International Development has today laid before both Houses a Departmental Minute on a £400,000 contingent liability which the Department for International Department has entered into.
	Under this arrangement DfID will extend its guarantee on a commercial loan to the Day Chocolate Company, a fair trade company partly owned by the Kuapa Kokoo cocoa co-operative. This marketing channel provides co-operative members with direct benefits in the form of fair prices and community-level projects. This is the first use of the power to provide financial assistance by way of a guarantee under the International Development Act 2002.

House of Lords: Peers' Motor Mileage and Bicycle Allowances

Lord Berkeley: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	Further to his Written Answer of 9 December (WA 51), and the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on the same day (WA 55), why the levels of reimbursement of Members' expenses in respect of travel by car are above the Treasury figure, while those for travel by bicycle are below the Treasury figure; and whether there are any plans to review these levels of reimbursement.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: The rate of the motor mileage allowance was originally set in 1984, when the House decided that it should be set on a single basis for all types of vehicle, with a reduced rate payable above 20,000 miles. The rate was, until 1994, uprated by reference to the RAC table of running costs; since then it has been uprated in line with the retail price index (RPI). The rate of the bicycle allowance was first set in 1998 on the basis of a recommendation by the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRP). It has been uprated annually since then in line with the RPI.
	As Members of the House are reimbursed on the basis of actual expenses incurred, and are not, in any event, employees, the maximum approved mileage allowance payment for employees does not apply to them, although I understand that the SSRB's recommendation in 1998 reflected then current Inland Revenue advice on the level of allowance allowable for tax purposes to employees using bicycles on official business.
	I understand that the SSRB will shortly begin a review of Members' reimbursement allowances.

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001: Newton Report

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they plan to publish the Newton report of the review of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We are today placing the report of the review of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 in the Library of the House.
	The Act came into force two years ago on 14 December 2001. The outrages committed on 11 September meant that we faced a new and unprecedented threat. The nature of this threat has been further underlined by the terrorist outrages since then notably in Bali, Singapore, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, and most recently Istanbul.
	The legislation introduced unique—although not unprecedented—powers. It was therefore right that a number of safeguards were put in place including an independent review committee made up of Privy Counsellors. This was established under the chairmanship of Lord Newton of Braintree. We gave an undertaking that the Committee's report would be laid before Parliament and that both Houses would be able to debate the contents of their report. We are fulfilling the first part of that commitment today by presenting the report to the House at the earliest opportunity and look forward to debating the matters raised in the New Year.
	We are grateful to my noble friend Lord Newton and his committee members for the work that has gone into this report and to all those who have contributed to the committee's review. Their role as Privy Counsellors has enabled them to take evidence from a wide range of individuals and organisations including security and intelligence agencies.
	At its heart, the Act focuses on ensuring that there are effective powers in place for dealing with international terrorism. These powers complement those already in place under the Terrorism Act 2000. They were, and are, necessary as a direct response to the public state of emergency existing within the United Kingdom following the events of 11 September. The judgment of the Court of Appeal upheld this when considering the appeal against the derogation from Article 5 of the ECHR which was necessary before the key Part 4 powers in the Act could be implemented. Other powers in the Act were needed to tackle crime and especially crimes which are closely associated with terrorism.
	As the House would expect given the nature of the legislation, the committee makes a large number of detailed recommendations which we are now in the process of considering carefully. We will also want to consider the report alongside that of my noble friend Lord Carlile (the independent review of the Terrorism Act 2000 and Part 4 of the ATCS Act) and the work of the ISC.
	Some few of the committee's conclusions can be implemented straightforwardly and quickly. For example, the committee's point on statistics relating to the number of individuals detained under Part 4 powers is well made—and we will ensure that these and the figures on terrorist arrests, which are already in the public domain, are placed on the terrorism website.
	We are also indicating to the House that we are willing to look very positively at many of committee's other recommendations. For example, we welcome the committee's recommendation that powers need to be enhanced to tackle identity theft, a crime that the Government have already identified as requiring urgent attention. We also welcome the Committee's support for strengthening measures to tackle terrorist finance. We will be publishing proposals shortly on strengthening our ability to deal effectively with all forms of organised crime.
	Whilst we will, of course, look carefully at what the committee has said in relation to the detention powers in Part 4 of the Act, we are not convinced that the current threat leaves us with any option but to continue to use these powers.
	Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 introduced exceptional powers to counter the risks to the United Kingdom posed by terrorist activity of the kind that led to the events of 11 September. We have limited the use of the powers to the terrorist threat posed by Al-Qaeda and the network of terrorist groups associated with it. The nature of that threat means that it is right to target those powers at foreign nationals. Because of that the specific powers we introduced are only used when an individual cannot be prosecuted and cannot be removed from the UK because of our international obligations, particularly Article 3 of the ECHR. None the less all of those detained are entitled to leave the United Kingdom at any time they choose—if a country is prepared to have them and countenance their presence—as two of those certified have already done.
	These were not powers we assumed lightly and we have only done so because of the nature of the threat that exists to the United Kingdom. We have never pretended that they are ideal, but we firmly believe that they are currently the best and most workable way to address the particular problems we face. Our first responsibility is to protect the public and we believe that we would be failing to do so if the Part 4 powers were removed from the armoury of measures available to protect the United Kingdom from specific terrorist threats. Ten of the detainees have already had their cases reviewed by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission—where they of course have the right to full legal representation—and in each case my judgment in certifying them has been upheld. We fail to see how the public would be adequately protected from those whom SIAC has confirmed are international terrorists by electronic tagging as the committee has recommended. This is true not least because communication and organisation are as crucial here as custodial protection in a physical sense.
	The committee conclude very firmly that terrorists are criminals—a view which we wholeheartedly support. We therefore do not accept that as a matter of principle we should separate counter-terrorism legislation from mainstream criminal legislation. Terrorism does not fit neatly into such boundaries as has been acknowledged in both the original debate on the Act and the findings of the ISC.
	The committee has used the provisions in Section 123 to specify that the whole of the Act be considered when we come to debate its renewal. We will, of course, provide the House with the opportunity to do that. The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 has improved our ability to fight crime and terrorism and the scope and therefore title of the Act reflects that. We accept that our primary duty is the security and protection of citizens of the United Kingdom and that this measure is a key element in achieving that. We look forward to a sensible and informed debate so that we can continue to build on this foundation while recognising the need for appropriate safeguards.

Corruption Bill

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What their response is to the Joint Committee on the draft Corruption Bill.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: I am pleased to announce the publication of the government response to the Joint Committee on the draft Corruption Bill.
	The draft Corruption Bill, which was published for pre-legislative scrutiny on 24 March 2003, was based on proposals from the Law Commission, which were widely welcomed in consultations carried out both by the Law Commission and by the Government. It aims to consolidate and clarify the criminal law on corruption which currently consists of a patchwork of common and statute law, with the latter dating back to 1889.
	The Government are grateful for the attention given to this draft Bill by the Joint Committee within demanding deadlines. The response which we are publishing today sets out our reactions to their comments. A revised Bill will be introduced when parliamentary time permits.
	The proposed legislation forms part of our commitment to modernise and consolidate the criminal law and should be seen in the context of a multi-faceted strategy to combat corruption. The elements of this strategy were set out in a statement made in another place. Progress has been made since then, not only on domestic law but also as regards the international law on corruption. In particular on 9 December the UK ratified the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption and signed the UN Convention Against Corruption.

Yarl's Wood Removal Centre

Baroness Hilton of Eggardon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to investigate the alleged events at Yarl's Wood detention centre made by the Daily Mirror newspaper.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 8 December, the Daily Mirror published allegations about the management of Yarl's Wood removal centre including allegations that staff employed by Global Solutions Limited (GSL) at the centre had made racially derogatory remarks about detainees.
	We take these allegations very seriously. It is of the utmost importance that all staff at immigration removal centres should carry out their duties professionally and sensitively.
	GSL has mounted an internal investigation of the allegations by a senior manager, and we have asked for a report of the outcome of that investigation. In addition, the issues raised are such that I have concluded that it would be right to have a separate independent investigation, to establish whether there is any truth in the allegations and to assess the implications for the management of Yarl's Wood.
	Stephen Shaw, the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, who is already inquiring into the events at Yarl's Wood on 14 and 15 February 2002, has agreed to undertake such an investigation, to report to us through the Director General of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate. We have asked Mr Shaw to complete this investigation as early as possible in the new year.

Ian Huntley: Employment Vetting Inquiry

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to investigate the events surrounding Ian Huntley's employment in Soham.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Ian Huntley has been found guilty of the horrific murders of Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells. Maxine Carr has been found guilty of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
	No one can imagine the pain which the children's families must have endured. We hope they will find some comfort in the murderer's conviction.
	We have concerns, however, about the way in which the police handled intelligence about Huntley's past and about the vetting process when he took employment in a local school. We are determined, speedily, to get to the bottom of this.
	We have asked Sir Michael Bichard, Rector of The London Institute and a former Permanent Secretary at the Department for Education and Employment, to lead an independent inquiry with the following terms of reference:
	"Urgently to enquire into child protection procedures in Humberside Police and Cambridgeshire Constabulary in the light of the recent trial and conviction of Ian Huntley for the murder of Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells. In particular, to assess the effectiveness of the relevant intelligence-based record keeping, the vetting practices in those forces since 1995 and information sharing with other agencies. Report to me on matters of local and national relevance and to make recommendations as appropriate".
	Sir Michael shares with us the view that what is needed here is an independent inquiry which gets quickly to the issues without putting the families and other parties through the stress which something long and drawn out could entail. He will expect full co-operation from all the parties. If he reports to us that this is unforthcoming we will not hesitate to use powers under Section 49 of the Police Act 1996 which will allow the inquiry to summon and question witnesses.
	Additionally, we have asked Sir Keith Povey, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary, to look at an inquiry that the Metropolitan Police conducted into the police investigation and then to work with Cambridgeshire Constabulary to implement the recommendations made. We will also want him to look at any lessons that could be learned by other forces facing a similar investigation.
	We will consider what further action may be appropriate when we have all the answers to the questions we have asked.
	Also the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, has informed us that North East Lincolnshire Area Child Protection Committee will be commissioning a Serious Case Review under the Government's guidance Working Together to Safegaurd Children.
	The aim of such a review would be to:
	establish whether there are lessons to be learned from the case about the way in which agencies in North East Lincolnshire worked together to safeguard childen;
	identify clearly what those lessons are, how they will be acted upon, and what is expected to change as a result; and as a consequence, to
	improve inter-agency working and better safeguard children.
	We would hope that the Bichard inquiry and the Serious Case Review would together address the full range of issues around safeguarding and protecting children that have arisen from this case.

Literacy Rates for 10 Year-olds

Lord Harris of High Cross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For each of the past five years for which figures are available, what are the literacy rates for 10 year olds in—(a) England; (b) Northern Ireland; (c) Scotland.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Information is not available in the form requested. The nearest equivalent for England and for Northern Ireland is shown in the table below and relates to pupils at the end of key stage 2 (most 11 year-olds will be at the end of key stage 2).
	Percentage of pupils in England and in Northern Ireland achieving level 4 or above in the key stage 2 English tests (teacher assessment in Northern Ireland, where there are no key stage 2 tests).
	
		
			  England Northern Ireland 
			 1999 71% 69% 
			 2000 75% 71% 
			 2001 75% 73% 
			 2002 75% 74% 
			 2003 75% not available 
		
	
	England took part in the 2001 PIRLS "Progress in International Reading Literacy Study" which compared "reading literacy" of 10 year-olds along with 34 other countries (including Scotland). England ranked third out of 35. Northern Ireland did not take part.
	I refer the noble Lord, Lord Harris, to the Scottish Executive for attainment information about Scotland as this is a devolved matter.

Astute Class Submarine: BAE Contract Negotiations

Lord Brooks of Tremorfa: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in finalising the contract negotiations with BAE Systems over the Astute Class Submarines.

Lord Bach: I announced on 19 February 2003 (Official Report, cols. WA175-177) that the Government had reached an agreement with BAE Systems on the way ahead for the Astute Class Attack Submarine project. However, at that point, it was accepted that some additional time would be required to establish the underpinning commercial arrangements and I undertook to report back to the House at a suitable moment. I am very pleased to be able to announce that on 17 December, an amended contract implementing the February Agreement was signed by the Ministry of Defence and BAE systems.
	This amended contract, which covers the design and construction of the first three boats, is designed to reduce risk while incentivising the company to improve its performance in delivering the programme. It also covers a number of project management improvements and oversight.
	Considerable progress has already been made in introducing these improvements and the MoD will be looking to the company to build on this as we jointly restore confidence in the programme. In February, we announced that the ISD for the first of class would be delayed. The company is now formally working to deliver "HMS Astute" in 2008.

Duchess of Kent Hospital, Catterick: Staff Redeployment

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What will be the future of the staff when the Duchess of Kent Hospital in Catterick is closed.

Lord Bach: All service personnel will be redeployed to other posts. Every measure is being taken to ensure that the number of compulsory redundancies of civilian staff is kept to a minimum. Those staff affected by redundancies will be aided in their search for employment by the Ministry of Defence outplacement scheme.

Defence Medical Services: Golden Hello Scheme

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the effect of the £50,000 "golden hello" on the recruitment of consultants into the Defence Medical Services.

Lord Bach: The Golden Hello scheme is proving to be a very effective means of increasing the recruitment of both consultants in the specialist medical categories which attract a Golden Hello payment and vocationally trained general medical practitioners (GMPs) into the Defence Medical Services.
	As of 30 November 2003, 12 months into the scheme, five consultants and six vocationally trained general medical practitioners (GMPs) had joined the Defence Medical Services (DMS) under the Golden Hello scheme. In addition, three consultants and nine vocationally trained GMPs have been accepted into the DMS and will receive their Golden Hello payment once they are commissioned in to their service. One consutant and seven GMPs are awaiting selection interviews. By comparison, in the 12 months prior to the introduction of the Golden Hellos in November 2002, the DMS recruited two consultants into the specialties that attract the additional payment, and four GMPs.

War Widows: Pensions

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the total cost, at current prices, of pensions paid to war widows in each of the past seven years.

Lord Bach: Information relating to the total cost, at current prices, of pensions paid to war widows is available only for the past five financial years. The table shows the estimated annual costs of payments under the war pensions scheme:
	
		
			 Year Cost (in £ thousands) 
			 1998–99 525,343 
			 1999–2000 509,441 
			 2000–01 488,153 
			 2001–02 466,582 
			 2002–03 448,201

Gulf War 1990–91: Vaccines

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will now publish in the Official Report the terms in which the then Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Dr Metters, advised the Ministry of Defence of his concerns, and those of the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, about combining the anthrax and pertussis vaccines in immunising troops deploying to the 1990–91 Gulf conflict.

Lord Bach: I refer my noble friend to my Written Answer on 9 October (Official Report, cols. WA 67–WA 78), specifically, paragraphs 5 to 8 of Annex A reproduced therein. Dr Metter's fax to the MoD said:
	"We have previously discussed the anxieties my experts have about the simultaneous administration of anthrax and pertussis vaccine.
	There are no such studies in humans that I am aware of, but you may wish to see the enclosed fax which I have just received from [name omitted] of the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control which reports on animal studies they have carried out.
	I think you [sic] Medical department needs to be aware of these preliminary results". The "enclosed fax", a letter from the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control to Dr Metters, said:
	"As you will know, we have recently carried out abnormal toxicity testing in laboratory animals on certain batches of B. anthracis and pertussis vaccine. When each of the two vaccines were tested alone they were not associated with an unusual degree of toxicity at single human dose level. However, when combined there was evidence of severe loss of condition and weight loss in animals.
	I would emphasise that these findings are preliminary but they do suggest that if used in man as a combined preparation, an enhanced degree of reactagenicity could occur. The users of these vaccines may wish to take these findings in [sic] consideration." The texts above were published by the MoD in the paper: Background to the Use of Medical Countermeasures to Protect British forces during the Gulf War dated October 1997, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. This paper is also available on the Internet at: http://www.mod.uk/issues/gulfwar/info/medical/mcm.htm and in hard copy as set out in my Answer of 20 November 2003 (Official Report, col. WA 341).

Armed Forces: Recruitment and Retention

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What improvements have been brought about in retention and recruitment in Her Majesty's Armed Forces as a result of the "Learning Forces" initiative and the educational opportunities available to those serving.

Lord Bach: Armed Forces recruitment and retention is one of the Government's highest priorities and our aim is to maintain excellent levels of retention through policies that genuinely reflect the priorities of our people and their families. The "Learning Forces" initiative is one of a number of initiatives introduced in recent years to improve both the recruitment and retention of Service personnel. "Learning Forces" is an expansion of educational and vocational training opportunities for Service personnel, including accreditation of Service training and civilian qualifications and learning credits. Taken together these have been effective although it is not possible to isolate the contribution made by any one individual measure.
	We believe that the initiative has contributed to a steady year-on-year progression in recruitment. In 2000–01 the Armed Forces achieved 90 per cent of the recruiting target and in 2001–02 the figure was 95 per cent. Furthermore, financial year 2002–03 was an excellent recruiting year. The number of new recruits was 26,220, and comfortably exceeded the target.

Afghanistan: Peace-keeping Troops

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to encourage more European Union members of NATO to contribute peace-keeping troops to the International Security and Assistance Force in Afghanistan; and with what results.

Lord Bach: Support to continuing stabilisation efforts in Afghanistan was discussed at the recent NATO defence ministerial meeting. All allies were urged to review their contributions to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) with a view to fill some identified shortfalls in capabilities. The force generation process for ISAF is conducted by NATO as a whole under the authority of the Secretary General.
	In addition to NATO-led efforts the Government, through both the FCO and MoD, discuss support to ISAF in their bilateral meetings with European Union nations. Ten of the 11 EU members of NATO have contributed troops to the ISAF operation.

Afghanistan: Peace-keeping Troops

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many United Kingdom troops are now based with the International Security and Assistance Force and how many are with coalition forces outside Kabul; how many of these belong to a provisional reconstruction team (PRT); and when they intend to create a second PRT outside Kabul.

Lord Bach: The United Kingdom currently has around 330 personnel serving with the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul. Around 100 other personnel serve with the coalition, some 90 of whom are with the provincial reconstruction team (PRT) in Mazer-e Sharif.
	The United Kingdom has no plans to establish a second PRT, although we continue to keep this under review.

RAF Fylingdales: Early Warning Radar

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What further progress has been made to implement their agreement to the United States' request to upgrade the early warning radar at RAF Fylingdales for missile defence purposes.

Lord Bach: In a Written Statement on 5 February 2003 by my right honourable friend the Defence Secretary (Official Report, Commons, col. 11–12WS) announced in another place that the Government had agreed to a US request to upgrade the early warning radar at RAF Fylingdales as part of the US missile defence programme. The Assistant Chief of the Air Staff, on behalf of the Ministry of Defence, has today signed an agreement setting out the management and financial arrangements and responsibilities for the radar upgrade. This agreement is made under the framework memorandum of understanding on missile defence that the Defence Secretary announced to the House on 12 June 2003 (Official Report, Commons, col. 57WS), and comes into immediate effect. Design work for the upgrade is already in hand, and upgrade work on site is expected to start in spring 2004, lasting for some 30 months, including testing of the upgraded system and removal of old equipment. I am placing in the Library of the House a copy of this agreement, although one section relating to a technical point on the operation of the radar has been withheld at the request of the US authorities. maria

State Pension: 25 per cent Rule

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many (a) women; and (b) men would have benefited in 2002–03 if the rule had been abolished which prevents a person receiving a basic state pension if they are entitled to less than 25 per cent of the pension.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The number of women and men who would have received basic state pension in 2002–03 if the rule had been abolished which prevents women over the age of 60 and men over the age of 65 from receiving basic state pension if they have less than 25 per cent of the qualifying years needed for a full basic state pension is in the table:
	
		
			  Number 
			 Women 86,000 
			 Men 12,000 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Numbers are rounded to the nearest thousand.
	2. These women and men are receiving graduated retirement benefit and/or additional state pension but no basic state pension.
	3. People in receipt of pension credit, housing benefit and council tax benefit may have their income related benefit(s) reduced if the rule which prevents women over the age of 60 and men over the age of 65 from receiving basic state pension if they have less than 25 per cent of the qualifying years needed for a full state pension is abolished.
	4. The numbers of people who would benefit are estimated using a 5 per cent sample of retirement pension administrative data for March 2003.

State Pension: 25 per cent Rule

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much it would cost to abolish the rule that prevents people receiving a basic state pension if they are entitled to less than 25 per cent of the pension.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The total maximum cost of abolishing the rule which prevents women over the age of 60 and men over the age of 65 from receiving basic state pension if they have less than 25 per cent of the qualifying years needed for a full basic state pension is estimated to be £93 million.
	Notes: 1. Costs are rounded to the nearest million, are in 2003–04 prices and are based on April 2003 benefit rates. 2. The costs are based on the numbers currently claiming state pension and it is assumed that there would be no increase in claimants if the 25 per cent rule were abolished. 3. People in receipt of pension credit, housing benefit and council tax benefit may have their income-related benefit(s) reduced if the rule which prevents women over the age of 60 and men over the age of 65 receiving basic state pension if they have less than 25 per cent of the qualifying years needed for a full state pension is abolished. 4. The numbers of people who would benefit are estimated using a 5 per cent sample of retirement pension administrative data for March 2003. 5. The assumption is that all pensioners who have made National Insurance contributions have a nine-year National Insurance contribution record, and are only just under the 25 per cent eligibility requirement.

Minimum Income Guarantee: Temporary Visits and Entitlement Reductions

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people had their minimum income guarantee entitlement reduced because of a temporary visit of more than four weeks to another country in 2002–03.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: Information on the numbers of people who have had their minimum income guarantee entitlement reduced because of a temporary visit of more than four weeks to another country in 2002–03 is not available.
	Minimum income guarantee was replaced by pension credit on 6 October 2003. Pension credit is only paid for the first four weeks of a person's temporary absence abroad unless special circumstances apply.

Minimum Income Guarantee: Temporary Visits and Entitlement Reductions

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assumptions they have made of the number of older people who may lose their entitlement to pension credit because of a temporary visit of more than four weeks to another country.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: Information on the numbers of people who have had their pension credit entitlement reduced because of a temporary visit of more than four weeks to another country is not available.
	Pension credit is only paid for the first four weeks of a person's temporary absence abroad unless special circumstances apply.

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of the staff rules of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: EBRD's public information policy covers public disclosure of its operational activities and invites public participation in the formulation of the country strategies, which guide the bank's lending activities. However, like many employers, it is not the bank's policy to disclose detailed information about the terms and conditions under which its staff are employed. This approach is consistent with the provisions of the bank's articles of agreement of which the UK is a founding signatory.

Employment Statistics

Lord Roberts of Conwy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of the 1.7 million new jobs created since 1997 were in (a) the public sector; and (b) the private sector.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from the National Statistician, Mr Len Cook, to Lord Roberts of Conwy, dated December 2003.
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question about jobs created in the UK since 1997. (HL374)
	While statistics of jobs created are not available explicity, statistics of employment and jobs from surveys enable comparisons to be made of net changes between 1997 and 2003.
	The latest statistics for total employment from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) show 28.2 million people in employment for the three months ending September 2003, compared with 26.5 million for the three months ending May 1997, a net increase of 1.7 million people in employment.
	Analyses of jobs by public and private sector are made using administrative returns, which are not as up to date as the LFS data. The latest information from this source shows that, of the total increase in jobs between 1997 and 2002, 30 per cent were in the public sector and 70 per cent were in the private sector.

Weightlifting and Diving Training Facilities

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Where, in the absence of Crystal Palace, Britain's weightlifting and diving squads will train for the 2004 Olympic Games.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The London Borough of Bromley, Sport England and the Mayor of London, and other interested parties are urgently discussing the future of the Crystal Palace sports complex, which includes the athletics track and stadium as well as the National Sports Centre. It is likely that the closure of the centre for re-development will form a part of any agreed solution.
	The Crystal Palace Sports Centre is not the official training venue of the UK's weightlifting and diving squads. A number of elite athletes in these sports do, however, use the centre's facilities. The governing bodies of both sports are considering alternative training venues in the south of England.

Domesday Book: Sports Facilities in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a Domesday Book of sports facilities will be prepared for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: This is for the consideration of each of the devolved administrations.

Sports Boards

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish details of the administrative budgets for sports boards in England.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The administrative budgets for the nine regional sports boards in England total £1,555,000. The breakdown by region is:
	
		
			 Region £ 
			 East 148,000 
			 East Midlands 155,000 
			 London 122,000 
			 North East 152,000 
			 North West 229,000 
			 South East 260,000 
			 South West 142,000 
			 West Midlands 152,000 
			 Yorkshire 195,000 
			 Total 1,555,000

Sports Boards

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government: Whether the chairpersons of the sports boards in England are paid; and, if so, how much.[HL471]

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Chairs of the regional sports boards in England receive annual remuneration of £10,000.

Sports Boards

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the estimated total of (a) lottery and (b) Exchequer funding due for disbursement by each of the sports boards in English regions.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The estimated total of lottery and Exchequer funding for disbursement by the nine regional sports boards over 2005–06 is:
	Lottery — £170,500,000
	Exchequer — £ 64,475,000 Lottery funds are distributed as follows:
	
		
			 Region £ 
			 East 15,277,000 
			 East Midlands 16,740,000 
			 London 24,911,000 
			 North East 17,689,000 
			 North West 27,249,000 
			 South East 19,447,000 
			 South West 14,869,000 
			 West Midlands 17,541,000 
			 Yorkshire 16,804,000 
			 Total 170,500,000

Disability Sports

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which disability sports governing bodies were in receipt of Exchequer funding in 2002–03; and what was the amount of grant aid in each case.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Sport England provide an annual grant to the English Federation for Disability Sport (EFDS) with the aim of leading a coordinated and unified approach to disability sport in England. They act as an umbrella group for the seven disability organisations recognised by Sport England. The groups are:
	The British Deaf Sports Council
	Cerebral Palsy Sport
	The British Wheelchair Sports Foundation
	The British Amputee & Les Autres Sports
	The English Sports Association for People with a Learning Difficulty
	Disability Sports England
	British Blind Sport
	The grant totalled £1.05 million in 2002–03.

Sport: Anti-doping Policy

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will follow the example of the World Anti-Doping Agency by approaching pharmaceutical companies to sponsor the work of the United Kingdom's anti-doping agency.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: At this time, the UK Government do not intend to approach pharmaceutical companies to sponsor the work of the UK's anti-doping agency. We are awaiting the outcome of the review of UK Sport's functions, which includes the role and responsibility for anti-doping arrangements in the UK, before we make any decisions on how the national anti-doping policy should best be delivered.

Carers

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What measures they have put in place to educate carers in safe lifting and handling techniques, particularly those caring for a patient in their own home.

Lord Warner: Regulation 14(8) of the Domiciliary Care Agencies Regulations 2003 requires agencies to make suitable arrangements, by training or other measures, to ensure that domiciliary care workers operate a safe system of working, including in relation to lifting and moving service users. National minimum standards on domiciliary care are taken into account by the National Care Standards Commission in determining whether the requirements of regulations are met.

National Health Service: Waiting Times

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether their records of waiting times for specific specialities are based on England-wide data rather than extrapolated from sample National Health Service trusts.

Lord Warner: Waiting times information is collected from all National Health Service trusts and primary care trusts where these organisations provide either a consultant-led inpatient service or a consultant-led outpatient service or both. The information is collected at speciality level and covers waits for elective inpatient admission and first consultant outpatient appointment following general practitioner or general dental practitioner referral. The information is also collected on a commissioner basis and primary care trusts submit specialty level data on patients waiting for services for which they have commissioned.

National Health Service: Waiting Times

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether those on the official waiting lists for specific specialities are from general practitioner referrals only; and whether they include doctor-to-doctor or nurse-to-doctor referrals across specialities.

Lord Warner: The current outpatient waiting time target applies to patients waiting for their first outpatient appointment with a consultant following a general practitioner or general dental practitioner does not include consultant-to-consultant, nurse-to-consultant or any other referrals.

Darent Valley Hospital PFI

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	(a) what was the total amount of equity investment by Carillion plc or any of its subsidiaries in the Darent Valley Hospital private finance initiative; (b) when that investment was made; (c) for how much and when that equity investment was sold; and (d) what drawback or profit share arrangements were in place in respect of that investment; and, if none, why not.

Lord Warner: In 1997 Carillion was awarded the contract for the Dartford and Gravesham National Health Service Trust private finance initiative project, now known as the Darent Valley Hospital. They invested £4.1 million in the project company established to carry out the contract. In November 2003 Carillion announced that it had sold its share of the investment in the Darent Valley Hospital PFI scheme for £5.2 million.
	In March 2003 the original loan taken out by the project company to finance the contract was replaced by a different loan—this resulted in a refinancing gain shared between the project company and the NHS trust. The NHS trust share of the benefits from this refinancing amounted to nearly £12 million.
	The sale of the equity investment will allow Carillion to crystallise the refinancing gain associated with their investment, which amounted to £11.2 million.
	While it is entirely right that the NHS trust should share in the refinancing gain, we would not expect it to benefit from the sale of equity in a project company by one private sector organisation to another.
	The recycling of equity is important to fund investment in future health PFI projects. maria

Huntington's Disease

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What public funding is currently directed to research into Huntington's disease; and
	What progress has been made in research leading to curing or arresting the spread of Huntingdon's disease in individual sufferers.

Lord Warner: In 2002–03 the Medical Research Council spent around £2 million on research into Huntington's disease. The Wales Gene Park, funded by the Welsh Assembly Government and the Department of Trade and Industry, has a programme of work on neurogenetics and neuropsychiatric genetics. Currently research is focused on a number of disorders including Huntington's disease. The Department of Health is funding some research of relevance to Huntington's disease, including £1.6 million spent in 2002–03 on research into dementia.
	The Chief Medical Officer's report, Stem Cell Research: medical progress with responsibility, published in 2000, considered the potential of embryonic stem cells as a source of new tissues for the treatment of neurological conditions including Huntington's disease. Such research is at a very early stage and it may be several years before therapeutic benefits are available. The Government have made available, through the research councils, £40 million over two years for stem cell research.

Huntington's Disease

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are their estimates of the number of deaths each year from Huntington's disease, and the number of current identified sufferers from the disease.

Lord Warner: The Office for National Statistics estimates that there are about 176 deaths each year from Huntington's disease. The Huntington's Disease Association estimates that it affects around one person in 10,000 in the United Kingdom.

Huntington's Disease

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which organisations currently give support to those suffering from Huntington's disease and to their families.

Lord Warner: The organisations currently giving support to those suffering from Huntington's disease are the National Health Service and social services. Additional support is given by the Huntington's Disease Association, a voluntary organisation.

Obesity

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What information they have on the numbers of adults who are (a) overweight, and (b) obese; what is the estimated daily rate of increase in these numbers; and by what percentage they estimate the number of adults who are overweight or obese has increased over the last 10 years.

Lord Warner: Figures from the Health Survey for England, which each year surveys a sample of the general population, are set out in the table. Overall numbers of the population who are overweight or obese have been estimated from the health survey only for 2001. The table also gives the proportion of men and women who were overweight or obese in 1991, when the survey began, and 2001 and the percentage increase over that period.
	
		
			  1991 2001 Difference 2001 
			  Percentage Percentage Percentage Number 
			 Men 
			 Overweight 42.0 46.6 11 8.6 million 
			 Obese 12.0 21.0 75 3.8 million 
			  
			 Women 
			 Overweight 29.0 32.9 13 6.7 million 
			 Obese 16.0 23.5 47 4.6 million 
		
	
	Notes:
	The samples sizes in 1991 and 1992 were smaller than in subsequent years and for reporting purposes the estimates from both years were combined.

Nutrition

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have made any assessment of the conclusions of the paper Very-low carbohydrate weight-loss diets revisited by Jeff S. Volek and Eric C. Westman (Cleveland Journal of Medicine, November 2002) and it simplications for public policy on diet and nutrition.

Lord Warner: We are aware of the conclusions reached in this paper that further research work is needed before conclusions can be reached about the long-term safety and efficacy of very-low carbohydrate weight loss diets. Government advice based on current scientific and medical opinion remains that the population should consume a balanced diet which is rich in carbohydrates and low in saturated fat.

Nutrition

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are monitoring the current work of the Government of the United States in reviewing its "food pyramid", with specific reference to the role of high carbohydrate intakes as a cause of obesity.

Lord Warner: The Food Standards Agency is in touch with the American authorities on their work in this area.

Health Professions Council: Grandparenting Procedure

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why they have not stipulated the need for an audit process into applications made under the Health Professions Council's "grandparenting" procedures; and whether there is any action they will now be taking in this regard.

Lord Warner: It is for the Health Professions Council (HPC) to set its transitional procedures (commonly known as "grandparenting") in accordance with the Health Professions Order 2001. These provide for each application received under the transitional provisions to be scrutinised by two HPC assessors, one clinical and one academic, from the applicant's profession. If the opinion of the two assessors differs or if there appears to be any inconsistency between the two assessments, the application is referred to a third assessor.
	In addition, applicants who are aggrieved by any refusal of their application for registration may also appeal to the council under Part VI, Article 37 of the Health Professions Order 2001. This ensures a thorough examination of applications against HPC requirements.

Medical Training

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there is an upper age limit for entering state-funded medical training.

Lord Warner: Although the Government set the target intake to medical school, all aspects of selection and admission are the responsibility of individual universities and medical schools. There is no upper age limit for entering medical school. In 1999, after a period of consultation, the Council of Heads of Medical Schools (CHMS) produced a set of guiding principles for the admission of medical students. The Department of Health welcomed these principles, which CHMS commends to medical schools to ensure good practice in equal opportunities throughout all the United Kingdom's medical schools. They state that "Medical schools welcome mature students who satisfy the selection criteria, but will take account of the length of postgraduate general and specialist training that doctors are required to undertake".

Department of Health: Purchase of Alcohol

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the purchasing arrangements for beer, wine and spirits required for entertainment by the Department of Health; and what was the amount spent by that Department under this heading in 2002–03.

Lord Warner: There are no specific arrangements for the purchasing of beer, wine and spirits. During the financial year 2002–03 a total of £850 was spent on these products.

Public Appointments

Lord Hogg of Cumbernauld: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When will the Government publish their response to the Public Administration Select Committee's Fourth Report of Session 2002–03 Government by Appointment: Opening Up the Patronage State.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr Douglas Alexander) published yesterday the Government's response to the Fourth Report of the Public Administration Select Committee, Government by Appointment: Opening Up the Patronage State.
	We are grateful for the committee's comprehensive and helpful report. We have considered the report in detail and undertaken in-depth consultation. The Government accept the majority of the committee's recommendations and is already implementing some of them.
	The key features of the Government's response are:
	Undertaking a review of public bodies sponsored by central government—
	The Government agree with the committee that the variety and complexity of public bodies supports the need for a review of their definition and scope.
	Ensuring that information about non-departmental public bodies is in the public domain—
	The Government support the need for details of public bodies within the remit of central government to be in the public domain.
	The Commissioner for Public Appointments—
	The Government agree with the committee that the Commissioner is central to the integrity and good practice of public appointments. The Government will examine the Public Appointments Order in Council to see whether it needs to be strengthened in order that the independence of the commissioner is assured. They will also update the schedule to the Order providing a definitive list of appointments regulated by the commissioner. The Government do not agree with the recommendation that the commissioner should be made solely responsible for appointing independent assessors, but will explore further with the commissioner how current arrangements operate to ensure that they are as robust as possible.
	Diversity—
	The Government accept a number of recommendations designed to encourage and improve diversity in public appointments including developing and piloting shadowing, mentoring and board development schemes for groups that are currently under-represented on boards of public bodies.
	Public Appointments Commission—
	The Government believe that it would be immensely difficult for a single body to cope with the diverse range of non-departmental public bodies and maintains that individual departments should continue to be responsible for appointments they sponsor. The Government recognise the value of having central teams in departments to advise on public appointments and work with sponsor teams. They also recognise that the NHS Appointments Commission is working well and some departments could benefit from using its services. The Government will be exploring this further.
	Copies of the Government's response [Cm 6056] have been placed in the Libraries of the House. maria

Iraq: Expenditure on Military Activity and on Reconstruction

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the latest estimate of (a) total military expenditure by the coalition for the war and subsequent military activity in Iraq; and (b) the financial value of resources provided for relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction in Iraq.

Lord Davies of Oldham: It is still too early to make an estimate of the total military expenditure in Iraq. However, the Ministry of Defence has drawn down £1 billion in last year's spring Supplementary Estimate from the £3 billion set aside to cover the cost of operations in Iraq. The Chancellor in his pre-Budget Report Statement confirmed that £2 billion has been carried forward into the Special Reserve for 2003–04 and in addition prudently set aside a further £800 million over two years; £500 million in 2003–04 and £300 million in 2004–05 for our international commitments in Iraq and the war against terrorism.
	At the Madrid Donor's Conference in October the International Development Secretary, Hilary Benn, announced the Government's pledge of £544 million to support the reconstruction of Iraq over the three years from 2003. Of this, £296 million will be for the next two financial years, including bilateral funds and the UK's share of the proposed EU contribution to Iraq.

M6 Toll

The Earl of Mar and Kellie: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Road Traffic Act 1991 applies on the M6 toll; and
	Whether there is a speed limit on the M6 toll; and, if so, what is that limit.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The M6 toll is subject to the Road Traffic Act 1991.
	The national speed limit of 70 mph applies on the M6 toll, with the exception of the two main toll plazas and their approaches, which have a permanent limit of 50 mph. For safety reasons, the toll plaza approaches are currently subject to temporary 30 mph limits while drivers become familiar with the new tolling arrangements. All wide-load lanes at the toll plazas are subject to a permanent 30 mph limit.

Congleton: Railway Service

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Davies of Oldham on 11 December (WA 90), whether the replacement bus service at Congleton Station during September and early October, when the train service was disrupted by engineering work, operated at all time specified in the passenger service requirement; and whether it was adequately publicised at the stations affected and through the National Rail Enquiry Service.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The replacement bus service was publicised by leaflets to passengers and provision of details to the National Rail Enquiry Service. The service was provided, by Fraser Eagle, generally to a high standard. About 95 per cent of the buses operated as scheduled. The problems with a minority of services were taken up with the operator.

Wales Office: Legislation and Welsh Assembly

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether all Bills requested by the National Assembly for Wales will be introduced in this Session of Parliament; and, if not, why not.

Lord Evans of Temple Guiting: The Wales Office competes each year with all other government departments for spaces in the legislative programme. The Wales Office has a good track record of securing Wales-only Bills, but also seeks opportunities to add Welsh clauses to other Bills, to secure the Assembly's legislative requests. In the current Session seven Bills have specific Welsh clauses, in addition to the Public Audit (Wales) Bill.
	Through these measures, we are enabling the Welsh Assembly to deliver its programme.